ATZ v AUA
[2015] SGHC 182

Case Number	:	Divorce Transferred No. 341 of 2012
Decision Date	:	14 July 2015
Tribunal/Court	:	High Court
Coram	:	Belinda Ang Saw Ean J
Counsel Name(s)	:	Bernice Loo and Sarah Ann Khoo (Allen & Gledhill LLP) for the plaintiff; Ranjit Singh (Francis Khoo & Lim) for the defendant.
Parties	:	ATZ — AUA

[LawNet Editorial Note: The appeal to this decision in Civil Appeal No 136 of 2015 was allowed in part by the Court of Appeal on 12 July 2016. See [2016] SGCA 41.]

14 July 2015

Belinda Ang Saw Ean J:

1       This judgment supplements my judgment in ATZ v AUA [2015] SGHC 161 released on 24 June 2015 (“June 2015 Judgment”), and I adopt the definitions which I have used there.

2       After the release of the June 2015 Judgment, Ms Loo informed the court in her letter of 26 June 2015 that the rental of the new accommodation at Villa Marina is $3,750 per month and not the figure of $3,150 as stated in [86] of the June 2015 Judgment. Ms Loo referred to the Tenancy Agreement dated 30 September 2014 for Villa Marina which she tendered without an accompanying affidavit during the hearing on 9 October 2014.

3       Mr Singh responded to Ms Loo’s letter on 9 July 2015. He confirmed that the current rent was $3,750 per month, and he agreed that this figure of $3,750 may be used for computation of maintenance.

4       In light of the above, and as the intention of the June 2015 Judgment is for the defendant to bear half of the rental of the accommodation that is near the child’s school, I now confirm and order that with effect from 1 July 2015, the plaintiff will receive a monthly sum of $3,375 as maintenance for the child, a breakdown of this figure is as follows:

(a)     $1,500 for the child’s maintenance; and

(b)     $1,875 being half share of the current rent of $3,750.